degrassifandomcom-20200223-history
Talk:BreakTheInternet/@comment-3575890-20161102210809
I can understand that people have reservations against Hillary, but to characterize her as the most corrupt politician to emerge in candidacy is such a fallacy that can only be chocked up to witch hunt mob mentality. Anyone would argue that the laundry list of claims and allegations is unnerving, but so much of it is fabricated or exaggerated to begin with. I won't get into that part of it however; that part of the research is left up to anybody willing to dabble in it. Instead I'll cut to the chase. Is she an ideal candidate? No. There is no such thing. In fact, even squeaky clean Sanders wasn't above criticism in some aspects. Regarding Hillary, there are certainly some things I don't like, but none of it stacks up against the baggage of her predecessors and especially her opponent in this race. And yet, you won't find a bigger double standard than the blatant dichotomy encompassed in the relation to media scrutiny, legal proceedings, and public response between her and former candidates. Now, I'm not saying she has a squeaky clean record. No politician does. But that record is not any worse than any other politician's. The difference is, no other presidential candidate's baggage has been more put out in the open, embellished, picked apart, and put under a scope. So as to ensure it doesn't look like I'm taking a page from the book of these propaganda sites by pulling fabrications out of nowhere, I'll cite some examples. A tally of 13 embassy attacks and 66 American deaths under Bush administration: there was no investigation. And to complete the picture of willful ignorance, media scrutiny was scarce. Then there was the 1983 Beirut bombings. More than 250 Americans were killed. An investigation was launched and it lasted a staggering few months. Neither of these dramatically larger incidents were made into a partisan issue. Now in juxtaposition of that, four American deaths in the Benghazi attack - what arose from this was 13 investigations, 7 against Hillary alone, 107 witness accounts, 8000 page report, 75,000 documents reviewed, 14 million of tax payers' dollars launched by the chairperson of House Republican, whom conducted his research like an overzealous prosecutor desperate to make a conviction - ZERO EVIDENCE OF CULPABILITY WAS FOUND. What does the public suggest? Quick, take my money and investigate her further! If you do not see a double standard in 13 investigations spurred on by four deaths, but only one investigation into more than 250 deaths, then you are willfully blind. You do not have to be a Hillary supporter to see the blatant discrepancy. You can hate her and still acknowledge that there is clear bias in relation to legal proceedings and public outcry relative to the repercussions (or lack thereof) that fell on Reagan and Bush. And let's not forget how not a peep was heard when 22,000,000 (that's right; 22 mill) e-mails of Bush's mysteriously vanished and are said to be viewable by 2021. Nobody cared and still does not care about that even though you can bet your ass those 22 million e-mails contain information of higher confidentiality than that of Hillary's e-mails when she was Secretary of state. It has been established that the bulk of HER e-mails were not classified at the time of the incident, event though they are now. Of the e-mails that have been leaked, and nobody can even authenticate all of them, nothing of significant importance has been revealed in them. Those she deleted, we have no way of knowing were admissible or not. She was told she did not have to retain any e-mails older than 60 days. So yes, to be quite honest, I do not give a rat's ass that Hillary didn't use proper security measures to protect some e-mails that weren't even classified at the time they were sent and have been proven to be of no paramount importance. I maintain that she SHOULD have used a more secure server, but even that would not have made her impervious to Russian hackers. I do not see the scandal in using a personal server when it was still legal to use. Sorry, you can't indict somebody for breaking a law that wasn't a law at the time. That's not how it works. At most, it was negligent, but no way does it amount to a scandal as juicy as the media has blown it out of proportion to be. In fact, it's not juicy at all; it's probably the least interesting scandal to sweep the news outlets and definitely the most dragged out. There's something to be said for that the Clintons are the most scrutinized political couple in all of history. A smear campaign against them has been going on for the last 30 years, and all they have found of verifiable merit against Hillary is some e-mails. I honestly could not care less. What I DO give a shit about is a known sexual predator who goes on trial next month for the alleged rape of a child could be elected into office. I have no way of knowing that part is true, but I do know - because I have heard with my own ears and seen with my own eyes - that he is not above sexual harassment, and very much below having any courtesy for the opposite sex's boundaries. Any man that barges in on women as young as 15 when they are changing is a lecherous creep that probably is not above the aforementioned allegations at all. And that is what concerns me most about this election. Not just Trump's unwavering display of misogyny, but his racism that knows no bounds, his hate and fear mongering tactics of acquiring comfort votes by playing on the public's fear of ISIS, his philosophy on nuclear weapons and the frightening concept of a man of his sort having access to the nuclear codes, his false show of support for the LGBT community when we all know he intends to appoint a Supreme Court Justice that has vowed to overturn gay marriage ruling if elected, his propensity to pull non-existent figures and stats from his ass to distort the facts - how the statistics ACTUALLY reveal that he lies more than any other candidate. His influence, his ability to tell the most obscene of lies and still have the general public eat up his every word, poses a greater threat than any other. I don't care about Hillary's e-mails because there are bigger fish to fry.